wouldn't bailout cause huge inflation?
harmony
trillion come from? surely bush did not earn it to donate to the ailing
american economy: he printed the money. now this printed trillion is no less
than one tenth of the national debt. and same as the national budget.
so, wouldn't this bailout cause masive inflation? how should we all prepare
ourselves for it?
James Beck
a...@hotmail.com says...
for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills have to be
approved by congress, right?
It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
As in most cases, the more the government does, the worse off we all
will be.
Mirza Ghalib
> In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills have to be
> approved by congress, right?
> It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
> dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
> congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
>
> As in most cases, the more the government does, the worse off we all
> will be.
Dont try to shift the blame from W. The present scenario is similar
to that of 2003 when W presented "compelling" evidence of "weapons
of mass destruction in Iraq". That piddly PM of UK, Blair, even went
to
the extent of declaring that Iraq weapons could attack UK within
45 minutes (as if UK is that important!). What choice the congress
had then, but to approve the Bush war? What choice it had now,
threatened by a complete meltdown of the economy unless the
bailout was OK-d.
To answer Harmony's question, it will certainly add to the inflation.
After all deficit financing is done by printing more money, and more
money chasing the same amount of goods results in higher prices.
A bigger danger is stagflation, though.
James Beck
@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, mgha...@yahoo.com says...
> On Oct 20, 9:01 am, James Beck <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:
> > In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > a...@hotmail.com says...> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into the economy. w
> > You do know that "the bush govt" needed a majority of democrats to vote
> > for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills have to be
> > approved by congress, right?
> > It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
> > dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
> > congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
> >
> > As in most cases, the more the government does, the worse off we all
> > will be.
>
>
> Dont try to shift the blame from W. The present scenario is similar
I'm not shifting any blame.
I'm making it clear that both sides of the isle are just as involved as
the other.
Do you not understand how the political system works here?
Did the bailout pass through a democratically controlled congress or
not?
Stray Dog
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008, harmony wrote:
> Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:43:58 -0500
> From: harmony <a...@hotmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.politics.republican, alt.politics.democrat,
> talk.politics.guns, alt.computer.consultants, soc.culture.indian
> Subject: wouldn't bailout cause huge inflation?
>
> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into the economy. where did this
> trillion come from?
Printing money.
> surely bush did not earn it to donate to the ailing
> american economy: he printed the money. now this printed trillion is no less
> than one tenth of the national debt. and same as the national budget.
>
> so, wouldn't this bailout cause masive inflation? how should we all prepare
> ourselves for it?
You can get almost any economic history book and learn that inflation
comes along with wars, and slightly after wars get started, and that is
because the wars always cost money and the money has to come from somewhere.
Rapid growth in economies should also be inflationary (just like recent
years in India and China) as the expansion of credit money (money loaned
out from depositors). One article I read was that a few years ago, Chinese
banks were loaning out up to 140% of deposits and after a couple of years
the loans became non-performing and had to be written off (Chinese "rabbit
out of the hat" trick). Some of this stuff gets very complicated, however.
RD (The Sandman)
news:35c3306e-1826-4f3e...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> On Oct 20, 9:01 am, James Beck <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:
>> In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> a...@hotmail.com says...> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion
>> into t
> he economy. w
>> You do know that "the bush govt" needed a majority of democrats to
>> vote for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills
>> have to be approved by congress, right?
>> It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one
>> trillion dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress,
>> and that the congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
>>
>> As in most cases, the more the government does, the worse off we all
>> will be.
>
>
> Dont try to shift the blame from W.
Don't try to blame all of the problems on him either. There is plenty of
blame to be shared on both sides of the aisle plus greedy execs,
predatory lenders and gullible consumers.
The present scenario is similar
> to that of 2003 when W presented "compelling" evidence of "weapons
> of mass destruction in Iraq". That piddly PM of UK, Blair, even went
> to
> the extent of declaring that Iraq weapons could attack UK within
> 45 minutes (as if UK is that important!). What choice the congress
> had then, but to approve the Bush war? What choice it had now,
> threatened by a complete meltdown of the economy unless the
> bailout was OK-d.
>
> To answer Harmony's question, it will certainly add to the inflation.
> After all deficit financing is done by printing more money, and more
> money chasing the same amount of goods results in higher prices.
> A bigger danger is stagflation, though.
>
--
Sleep well tonight.........RD (The Sandman)
http://home.comcast.net/~rdsandman
"Be who you are and say what you feel...Because those that
matter...don't mind...And those that mind...don't matter."
ker...@gmail.com
Whenever additional money is infused in the society, certain
indispenisible sectors(energy, healthcare) raise their pricing
structures, just because economy can now afford to bear such price
hike. as a result, the addional infusion of money land right in the
lap of such sectors. That is why every tax rebate saw huge price
spikes in oil prices. That is why drugs that sell for arm and leg are
sold for pea nuts in poor countries. That is why salary boom brought
about by outsourcing in India has brought about staggering inflation
in India - because what the society can bear determines how key
industries tailor their pricing.
Peter Franks
> the bush govt
There is no such thing.
Revising to "The government..."
If things go as hoped, this will not lead to inflation as the $$ is
being used to purchase /assets/ that have a value.
The expectation is that the value of these assets will increase over the
next few of years, at which point the government would sell them back to
the private market (presumably at fair market value which is presumed to
be higher than it is now). If that all works out as they hope, then
there shouldn't be any inflation because the purchased assets have a
tangible value equal to or more than the value of the $$ used to
purchase the assets.
HOWEVER, if the assets decrease in value, prepare for some rougher
times. A lot rougher.
(Note: assets are referring to mortgages and derivative instruments.)
Commentary: Please take the opportunity now to review your debt. For
quite some time now, enlightened and inspired people have been
counseling us to get out of debt as soon as possible. I support that
counsel and have been working toward it, and as a result, I have been a
lot less susceptible to (direct) financial stress due to market conditions.
Gray Ghost
> On Oct 20, 9:01 am, James Beck <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:
>> In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>> a...@hotmail.com says...> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into
>> the economy. w You do know that "the bush govt" needed a majority of
>> democrats to vote for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending
>> bills have to be approved by congress, right?
>> It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
>> dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
>> congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
>>
>> As in most cases, the more the government does, the worse off we all
>> will be.
>
>
> Dont try to shift the blame from W. The present scenario is similar
> to that of 2003 when W presented "compelling" evidence of "weapons
> of mass destruction in Iraq". That piddly PM of UK, Blair, even went
Really you dull simpleton? Who were the top 3 recipients ofdonations from
Freddie and Fannie? Who kept saying there was nothing wrong? Who was fucking
one of the top execs at Fannie (write your own joke here)? What can one
conclude from that?
> to
> the extent of declaring that Iraq weapons could attack UK within
> 45 minutes (as if UK is that important!). What choice the congress
> had then, but to approve the Bush war? What choice it had now,
> threatened by a complete meltdown of the economy unless the
> bailout was OK-d.
>
> To answer Harmony's question, it will certainly add to the inflation.
> After all deficit financing is done by printing more money, and more
> money chasing the same amount of goods results in higher prices.
> A bigger danger is stagflation, though.
--
Always remember:
Bull Connor was a Democrat!
habshi
money back from those who have profited.
Peter Franks
> Cancel all the mortgage debts created by fraud and take the
> money back from those who have profited.
The developers? The construction materials industries?
Most are tanking, nothing to take back even if you think the blame lies
with them.
Tim Miller
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:02:21 GMT, hab...@anony.com (habshi) wrote:
>
>> Cancel all the mortgage debts created by fraud and take the
>> money back from those who have profited.
>
>
SO cowardly, piglet. One wonders why you're SO afraid of
Jewish folks that you have to forge posts?? Are those
Jewish girls STILL beating you up for your lunch money??
ROFLMAO!!
Mirza Ghalib
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:35c3306e-1826-4f3e...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>
> Don't try to blame all of the problems on him either. There is plenty of
> blame to be shared on both sides of the aisle plus greedy execs,
> predatory lenders and gullible consumers.
>
> The present scenario is similar
>
The whole basis of the capitalist system is based on greed. If greed
is in moderation, it works. If unfettered, it is robbery.
What is the justification for CEOs running away with astronomical
compensation after they have scuttled their companies. One
Mozillo of Countrywide ran away with 40+ million after his
company went bust and was bought by Bak of America. Whose
duty is it to regulate corporations?
Bush and company sitting at the top of pyramid introduced a
new culture engineered by people like Karl Rove. How could this cabal,
itself involved in scandals after scandals (such as firing of the
US attorneys because they were probing Republican wrongdoings,
or threatening their own staff with firing in the Medicare drug bungle
if
they made public huge projected overruns in the program) oversee
others
to run a clean shop? Clinton looks like a saint by comparison.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
The US is fighting two wars, and possibly a third one -- to
keep a terrorist's pal and associate out of the White House.
Extraordinary circumstances lead to extraordinary measures
and then extraordinary consequences.
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/24fq83
http://www.mantra.com/jai
http://www.mantra.com/jyotish
Om Shanti
RD (The Sandman)
> On Oct 20, 12:21 pm, "RD (The Sandman)"
> <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:35c3306e-1826-4f3e-8c3d-0
> e4ccd...@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>
>> Don't try to blame all of the problems on him either. There is
>> plenty
> of
>> blame to be shared on both sides of the aisle plus greedy execs,
>> predatory lenders and gullible consumers.
>>
>> The present scenario is similar
>>
>
> The whole basis of the capitalist system is based on greed. If greed
> is in moderation, it works. If unfettered, it is robbery.
>
> What is the justification for CEOs running away with astronomical
> compensation after they have scuttled their companies.
That is a problem with corporate boards and their hiring policies. It
has become traditional to provide golden parachtes regardless of company
success. They need to start hiring CEOs under the philosophy of merit
pay. If your company does well, so will you. If it goes down the toilet,
so will you.......no parachute.
One
> Mozillo of Countrywide ran away with 40+ million after his
> company went bust and was bought by Bak of America. Whose
> duty is it to regulate corporations?
Where in the Constitution is the right (or power, for a better word) for
the government to do that?
> Bush and company sitting at the top of pyramid introduced a
> new culture engineered by people like Karl Rove.
What new culture was that? It isn't capitalism....nor is it asking
financial institution to produce subprime loans for the poor....nor is it
the lack of oversight on GSEs during the last Congress.....
How could this cabal,
> itself involved in scandals after scandals (such as firing of the
> US attorneys because they were probing Republican wrongdoings,
> or threatening their own staff with firing in the Medicare drug bungle
> if
> they made public huge projected overruns in the program) oversee
> others
> to run a clean shop? Clinton looks like a saint by comparison.
Clinton's shop wasn't so clean either. You have a short memory in
addition to thinking that the root of all these problems only started 8
years ago.
Bama Brian
Heh! Last weekend, my wife and I took a look at a townhome development
which had been foreclosed by a bank. Of 85 planned units, 28 sold, 17
now available. Maybe ten more just sitting incomplete. Entire
development has been sitting for over a year, with only one or two sales
during the year.
Big article in the financial section about it. The bank said make us a
reasonable offer. Funny how the bank's version of reasonable does not
match mine - not yet, anyway.
--
/home/eddy/Desktop/dox/sigfile
harmony
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
let's recall al gore for a moment:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/129202.html
ThreeLegends
> let's recall al gore for a moment:
OK...
The Moment is gone... next!
Felix D.
Let's not. We're still trying to forget him over here, Jay.
Juan M
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9B3E59A1F...@216.196.97.131...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist:
1998: Peace and Prosperity
2008 Death and Disaster
Mirza Ghalib
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote innews:07b2620d-aa6a-400a...@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 12:21 pm, "RD (The Sandman)"
> > <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote
> >> innews:35c3306e-1826-4f3e-8c3d-0
These matters are not governed by the constitution. Where in the
constitution is it written that all industries shall run unregulated?
Where in the constitution it says that there should be "free"
trade?
The point is that controls have to be devised to see that they
work honestly and be beneficial to the people of USA. The
chief responsbility
Take your blinkers off. Clinton reduced the deficit to zero, and
created a surplus of several hundred billions. The present
occupant ends his careers with a half trillion dollars deficit,
a massive (almost 100%) increase in federal debt, a looming
depression, public money being poured into saving private
corporations, and a severe inflation to boot. Oh yes, two
interminable wars. I rest my case.
Benj
> so, wouldn't this bailout cause masive inflation?
Obviously, yes.
> how should we all prepare ourselves for it?
By converting all your money (paper) into wealth (valuable objects).
Even better use your money to go deeply into debt. That way you can
pay off the debt with inflated dollars making a killing. Hence use
your money to get "bailout" loans on houses now at rock bottom prices,
which you can pay off later with worthless inflated dollars! You win,
while other taxpaying suckers lose!
outsourci...@yahoo.com
If you are really worried about massive inflation (which can occur in
dire emergencies like war time etc.) the answer is simple. Buy gold
with your spare money that you don't need from now till the time you
envision such an emergency. :)
Bama Brian
> On Oct 21, 8:48 am, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:07b2620d-
aa6a-400a-98f...@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
And you should.
First, I believe that the US should never have invaded either Afghanistan
or Iraq. Those wars are huge tactical blunders and cost the US far too
much money while adding nothing to national security.
BUT...
Clinton added $1.2 trillion to the National Debt - and you call that a
"balanced" budget with a "surplus"?
Clinton closed an amazing number of military bases and cut defense
spending to the bone. He further added to today's financial problems by
expanding Jimmy Carter's Community Reinvestment Act and forcing both
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to make sub-prime loans.
Clinton ignored the ever-increasing muslim problem by doing absolutely
nothing about the FIRST bombing of the WTC in 1993, bombed an aspirin
factory instead, and then invaded Somalia and got his butt kicked.
And let's not forget that the run-amok federal tragedy of Waco, Texas,
occurred on his watch, with "Jackboots" Janet Reno committing the forces
to the final assault. Not having learned her lesson there, she later
created the Elian Gonzales media event.
Maybe you also should take your blinkers off and start looking seriously
at your hero; you'll find he's just as flawed as Bush.
--
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana, 1863 - 1952
Cheers,
Bama Brian
Libertarian
James Beck
2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>, mgha...@yahoo.com says...
>
> These matters are not governed by the constitution. Where in the
> constitution is it written that all industries shall run unregulated?
> Where in the constitution it says that there should be "free"
> trade?
Well, there is one thing in the Constitution that covers EXACTLY what
you are asking. The part that says if it isn't explicitly spelled out
in the Constitution then that power is reserved by the people or the
states.
Now, that being said, there is the commerce clause that allows
regulation of interstate commerce and the control/duties on imports. I
think the commerce clause has been stretched beyond the breaking point,
but it is there.
harmony
"Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:e0e38f3e-eaac-4517...@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
lol. not that you are wrong.
so, you are saying people should take out home equity loans and buy up a
whole bunch of gold?
ThreeLegends
You can't eat gold, you stump stupid hindu cunt.
RD (The Sandman)
news:5eCdncOd9a_MFmPV...@centurytel.net:
Takes a lot more than a simple statement to properly affix blame and
causes.
RD (The Sandman)
> On Oct 21, 8:48 am, "RD (The Sandman)"
> <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:
>> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> innews:07b2620d-aa6a-400a-98f3-6
> 0ff7f...@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
The Constitution is a limitation on the power and areas of control of the
federal government. It is not intended to be a business primer.
> The point is that controls have to be devised to see that they
> work honestly and be beneficial to the people of USA. The
> chief responsbility
Yes, but where do those controls lie? In the Barney Franks of the world?
In the presidency? In the bankers?
> Take your blinkers off. Clinton reduced the deficit to zero, and
> created a surplus of several hundred billions.
No, he didn't. He produced a surplus instead of a deficit but not in the
national debt. There is a big difference in a yearly deficit or surplus
and a true surplus free of debt. He didn't do that.
The present
> occupant ends his careers with a half trillion dollars deficit,
> a massive (almost 100%) increase in federal debt,
OK, then you are acknowledging that the debt was not zero under Clinton.
BTW, most of that surplus you mention was *forecast* for the outyears.
It didn't actually come to pass in the amounts most people think.
a looming
> depression, public money being poured into saving private
> corporations,
Voted on by more Democrats than REpublicans, but that is besides the
point.
and a severe inflation to boot. Oh yes, two
> interminable wars. I rest my case.
The point is that there is plenty of blame to be shared from both sides
of the aisle, predatory lenders, gullible consumers and greedy execs.
RD (The Sandman)
@news.suddenlink.net:
>
> "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
> news:e0e38f3e-eaac-4517-b0a1-
a46629...@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Houses are cheap and plentiful......gold is not such a good investment
now. It was a good one two months ago.
Felix D.
Ammunition will prove more valuable than gold if Obama's elected.
harmony
"RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9B3F7601...@216.196.97.131...
> "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:48ff68d5$0$5468$bbae4d71
> @news.suddenlink.net:
>
>>
>> "Benj" <bja...@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
>> news:e0e38f3e-eaac-4517-b0a1-
> a46629...@q35g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Oct 20, 11:43 am, "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> so, wouldn't this bailout cause masive inflation?
>>>
>>> Obviously, yes.
>>>
>>>> how should we all prepare ourselves for it?
>>>
>>> By converting all your money (paper) into wealth (valuable objects).
>>> Even better use your money to go deeply into debt. That way you can
>>> pay off the debt with inflated dollars making a killing. Hence use
>>> your money to get "bailout" loans on houses now at rock bottom prices,
>>> which you can pay off later with worthless inflated dollars! You win,
>>> while other taxpaying suckers lose!
>>
>> lol. not that you are wrong.
>> so, you are saying people should take out home equity loans and buy up
> a
>> whole bunch of gold?
>
> Houses are cheap and plentiful......gold is not such a good investment
> now. It was a good one two months ago.
>
>
so far i notice two suggestions:
you are into real estate, and felix into ammo (looks like obama is widening
his lead with every passing day).
my take:
- on real estate, credit is very tight, you will likely be sitting on it
paying taxes and doing thankless maintanence for at least 2 years. besides,
housing trend may be cahnging
http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/10/22/tiny.houses/index.html
- ammo: well, if you must, remember you are not buying it for economics so
much as for defence. in other owrds, it is not an investment.
may be it is time to set up new advisementing business to advise people "how
to cope with bad times" - of course, first you must learn it yourself. i
think there is money to be made there.
Felix D.
> my take:
If I want the opinion of some herky jerky Hawaiian glue sniffing puke I'll
ask for it, Jay.
patpow...@gmail.com
> In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> a...@hotmail.com says...> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into the economy. where did this
> > trillion come from? surely bush did not earn it to donate to the ailing
> > american economy: he printed the money. now this printed trillion is no less
> > than one tenth of the national debt. and same as the national budget.
>
> > ourselves for it?
>
> You do know that "the bush govt" needed a majority of democrats to vote
> for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills have to be
> approved by congress, right?
> It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
> dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
> congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
>
The Federal Reserve already has authority to create trillions of
dollars and is using it. Congress does not have much to do with that.
They are printing trillions of dollars. But not to worry. Inflation
will be warded off by firing millions of people and foreclosing on
their mortgages. Already the tent cities form.
Tim Miller
>
The usual poor forgery from piglet...
patpow...@gmail.com
> Cancel all the mortgage debts created by fraud and take the
> money back from those who have profited.
But those who have profited rule this nation. The bailout is intended
to give them a LOT more money.
rick++
Prices on stocks, commodities, housing, currencies have fallen 30% -
70% in 2008.
Salaries are next in line with increasing layoffs.
there isnt surplus money, buts evaporated.
harmony
"James Beck" <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.23668b51b...@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
In article <35c3306e-1826-4f3e-8c3d-0e4ccde2e484
@t39g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, mgha...@yahoo.com says...
> On Oct 20, 9:01 am, James Beck <j...@reallykillersystems.com> wrote:
> > In article <48fca6fd$0$5476$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > a...@hotmail.com says...> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into
> > the economy. w
> > for the bailout, right? You do know that all spending bills have to be
> > approved by congress, right?
> > It isn't as if W has any super president power to enact a one trillion
> > dollar spending spree without the approval of the congress, and that the
> > congress is majority Democrats at the moment.
> >
> > will be.
>
>
> Dont try to shift the blame from W. The present scenario is similar
I'm not shifting any blame.
I'm making it clear that both sides of the isle are just as involved as
the other.
Do you not understand how the political system works here?
Did the bailout pass through a democratically controlled congress or
not?
------------------------------------------
that's nonesense.
among the very few "most wanted" listed by cnn for being directly
responsible for the meltdown is the conservative economics icon phil gramm -
who, btw, also has been mccain's top economy advier until he called
everybody a whiner because his policies were making everybody to be whining.
Felix D.
"Klaus Schadenfreude" <kschade...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:nirvf4tvd2f6i8d8i...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:24:10 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Che...@OGPU.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
And here''s Piggy with his head up his ass - as always.
RD (The Sandman)
news:48ff8e23$0$5493$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net:
Not any more.
and felix into ammo (looks like obama is
> widening his lead with every passing day).
So am I.
> my take:
> - on real estate, credit is very tight, you will likely be sitting on
> it paying taxes and doing thankless maintanence for at least 2 years.
If you have the cash, real estate is an excellent investment at this
time. Prices are depressed and with excellent credit I have no problem
getting whatever financing I need. I just am doing other things
currently with my money.
> besides, housing trend may be cahnging
> http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/10/22/tiny.houses/index.html
> - ammo: well, if you must, remember you are not buying it for
> economics so much as for defence. in other owrds, it is not an
> investment.
However, it may be worth its weight in gold if this recession continues
for long.
> may be it is time to set up new advisementing business to advise
> people "how to cope with bad times" - of course, first you must learn
> it yourself. i think there is money to be made there.
Then why don't you go and get busy in that venture?
harmony
so, won't you now tell is about the "other things"?
now won't you be nice and share us with us your secret money making
ventures.
i thought we were friends. i shared my idea.
dr. wayne dyer says it is good to share than hoggging it all.
Scout
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2008 09:57:54 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Che...@OGPU.org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <kschade...@qwest.net> wrote in message
>>news:nirvf4tvd2f6i8d8i...@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 19:24:10 -0700, "Felix D." <#1Che...@OGPU.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:48ff8e23$0$5493$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net...
>>>>
>>>>> my take:
>>>>
>>>>If I want the opinion of some herky jerky Hawaiian glue sniffing puke
>>>>I'll
>>>>ask for it, Jay.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The usual elementary tirade from Felix the Fag.
>>
>>And here''s Piggy with his head up his ass - as always.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Gloating in the misery of others makes my day!
>
> Jews run the world, while you're unemployed and sniff glue out of
> a dirty sock.
>
> That's why they can do anything they want, and you can't get away with
> shit.
>
>
>
> ................................................................
> Posted via TITANnews - Uncensored Newsgroups Access
> >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<<
> -=Every Newsgroup - Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
You are aware that you are in violation of your terms of service, yet again?
Scout
"Judge Pigglesworth" <albri...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:lse1g45ong0klm36m...@4ax.com...
>
>
> Arma de fuego son salvajes arruinando América!
> Votación Obama más estrictas para el control de armas!
>
> The Semi-Honorable Judge J. P. Pigglesworth, presiding
So tell me Judge, when you and our forger both lose their newsreader.com
accounts at the same time, and both switch over to titanews at the same
time.....would that be reasonable evidence that you are one and the same?
:-)
Mirza Ghalib
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:52:32 -0700, Mirza Ghalib wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 8:48 am, "RD (The Sandman)" <rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >> Mirza Ghalib <mghali...@yahoo.com> wrote
At least you acknowledge that the two wars were serious blunders.
However, they were launched with premeditation, using deceit and
expectation of huge profits. Did you notice that the friends of the
White house were amply rewarded for supporting the white house
in this effort? How much of that 10 billion per month goes into the
war and how much into the pockets of the profiteers, who can
tell.
You are all upset that Clinton increased the national debt by 1.2 T
dollars. How much borrowed money did another eminent republican
who said "there is no shortage of oil, there is surplus of
government",
and all those pleasing words, spend? If I remember, it was three T
dollars. Clinton was well on his way to minimize the national debt.
The present administration continues to steal from the future.
The total deficit created by Reagan & Bush is 9 T dollars and
you are raising hell over what Clinton incurred.
Is that WACO and Gonzales event significant in the causation of
the present economic disater? Thank God Bush's effort to sell the
SS system to Wall Street did not succeed.
You are wrong about the handling of WTC I. About half a dozen of
well known Islamic terrorists were nabbed and they are serving
life sentences. Among them are Ramzi Yousef & the Blind Mullah.
His military intervention record may not be perfect, but neither is
Bush's.
Daniel Bergman
> Cancel all the mortgage debts created by fraud and take the
> money back from those who have profited.
And take house's away from those who bought knowing they could not
afford it.
Daniel Bergman
> The whole basis of the capitalist system is based on greed.
Wrong, capitalism is based on self-interest, not greed.
RD (The Sandman)
@newsfe14.iad:
> Mirza Ghalib wrote:
>> The whole basis of the capitalist system is based on greed.
>
> Wrong, capitalism is based on self-interest, not greed.
>
>
Actually, capitalism and greed are both based on self interest.
Peter Franks
I think that is largely what happened: foreclosure.
SaPeIsMa
"Daniel Bergman" <nom...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:i1%Nk.5585$yx1....@newsfe14.iad...
> Mirza Ghalib wrote:
>> The whole basis of the capitalist system is based on greed.
>
> Wrong, capitalism is based on self-interest, not greed.
To socialist of ANY stripe, there is NO difference between self-interest and
greed
After all, if you're not willing to give of yours to those who don't have
it, that's greed
DockScience
> the bush govt has pumped in one trillion into the economy. where did this
> trillion come from? surely bush did not earn it to donate to the ailing
> american economy: he printed the money. now this printed trillion is no
> less than one tenth of the national debt. and same as the national budget.
>
> prepare ourselves for it?
The trillion has not been pumped yet. Very few actual payments have been
made.
And where does it come from? Borrowing.
If the T-bills aren't purchased, the trillion isn't there.